[ppml] IPv6 Justifications

[Richard Jimmerson]

Hello Jeff,

The current IPv6 policies implemented by the ARIN staff
were created by the ARIN community.  In the case of the
IPv6 addressing policies, the same policy is implemented
across all four Regional Internet Registries (APNIC, ARIN,
LACNIC, and RIPE NCC).  A single IPv6 policy document was
agreed to by the communities of all the RIRs.  

When it comes to implementing an IPv4 policy for small
multihomed organizations, that is up to the ARIN community,
not the ARIN staff.  ARIN staff does not make decisions about 
Internet resource policy.  A full description of the process 
is available at http://www.arin.net/policy/ipep.html.

Policy Proposal 2002-7 did not achieve consensus with the
community to be passed as written at the last ARIN meeting.  
Policy Proposals 2002-3 and 2002-7 were very similar, as both
proposed small IPv4 assignments/allocations for multihomed
organizations.  The authors of policy proposal 2002-3 have
drafted some clarifying language that will be posted to the
public policy mailing list for discussion, along with all
other policy proposals, over the next week.

Best Regards,

Richard Jimmerson
Director of Operations
American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-ppml at arin.net [mailto:owner-ppml at arin.net] On 
> Behalf Of Jeff S Wheeler
> Sent: Monday, February 24, 2003 6:06 PM
> To: ppml at arin.net
> Cc: richardj at arin.net
> Subject: RE: [ppml] IPv6 Justifications
> 
> 
> On Mon, 2003-02-24 at 14:57, Richard Jimmerson wrote:
> > The current IPv6 policy in place that ARIN staff uses to review 
> > requests for IPv6 address space cites the 200 /48 
> assignments in two 
> > years language, therefore asking questions about that is 
> part of the 
> > request process.
> I'm not aware of the issues surrounding the implementation of 
> ARIN policy, so perhaps you can enlighten me.  If there is a 
> FAQ or other document which I have missed, I must apologize 
> in advance for being ignorant of this resource.
> 
> What is the reason that ARIN chooses to implement policy and 
> operate in a manner that restricts IPv6 assignments in such a 
> manner as to hinder IPv6's wide-spread adoption, when, 
> seemingly, ARIN refuses to implement an IPv4 small-multihomer 
> policy, such as 2002-7, which was adopted by the membership's 
> voting body, as I understand.  I am not aware of the process 
> by which ARIN's operations are governed, however I would 
> appreciate any insight you could give me with regard to 
> policy-making matters in general, and specifically the 
> non-implementation of 2002-7.
> 
> Kind thanks,
> 
> --
> Jeff S Wheeler <jsw at five-elements.com>
>